Auckland Unitary Plan

19 comments on “Auckland Unitary Plan ”

• Comments are now closed

1. Brutus Iscariot 1

   27 July 2016 at 10:51 am

   Hopefully the shrill voices of the NIMBYs won’t have prevailed.
   • dukeofurl 1.1

     27 July 2016 at 10:59 am

     It wasnt so much the Nimbys but those who were cut out of the debate because the Council bureaucrats ‘upsized’ from the originally released plan, which largely cut off from any objections those who were largely happy with the first published plan.
     • Sabine 1.1.1

       27 July 2016 at 11:11 am

       good grief, most of the town was cut out, but alas, they are not living in the right neighbourhoods to complain about having their ‘democratic’ rights taken away.
       • dukeofurl 1.1.1.1

         27 July 2016 at 1:49 pm

         Thats absurd, if you dont join the debate, how can you be ‘cut out’.

         I can think of an ex supermarket site in Auckland , that was bought 15 years ago for intense development by the Council- never happened. Was it because not the right neighbourhood.
         • Keith 1.1.1.1.1

           27 July 2016 at 5:12 pm

           I would argue the Nimby’s have won. The super suburbs like larges parts of Judges Bay (John Key), noticeable parts of Remuera, all of Devonport, Northcote Point, Chastswood and Birkenhead Point remain firmly single level dwellings. Hard core National voting territory and Northcote Point the home of Minister “Its all Labours fault” Jonathan Coleman.
2. whispering kate 2

   27 July 2016 at 11:45 am

   There will be mutterings and witterings and screams of rage in the leafy suburbs methinks. Because these leafy suburbs usually have quite large land sites for their homes, it pretty obvious they are just ripe for development into 4 storey apartment dwellings – like to be a fly on the wall in some of these homes today.

   But As Sabine says those leafy suburban residents seem to have the clout with Council and or Government (remember our PM resides over two sites in Parnell), so it will be interesting to see what prevails.
   • dukeofurl 2.1

     27 July 2016 at 1:54 pm

     Large land sites are a myth. The average land site is common across say residential 6. These large sites have been split into two mostly by now as the land is so valuable.

     Its clear you know nothing about the existing residential zoning.
     leafy suburbs? have you ever driven through Papatoetoe or Glenfield, they too are leafy after 50 years.
     • whispering kate 2.1.1

       27 July 2016 at 2:15 pm

       Don’t buy into that at all. There are many large sites still left with lovely old homes on them, Christine Fletcher on the Council has a large site and so do many others. Of course it lends to the character and history of Auckland but times are changing and now the need is great to allow homes to be built closer to the city for obvious reason like transport costs. As for “Leafy Suburbs” – these lovely older suburbs have always been known as that – you are splitting straws, though I don’t know why really.
       • dukeofurl 2.1.1.1

         27 July 2016 at 6:19 pm

         I looked it up just off Valley Rd. Its a long irregular site 5000m2,and is the exception to the sites around it 900-700 m2.
         Drive through any ‘leafy street’ in Epsom and most have been subdivided allready, as they were previously 20’s bungalows
3. James 3

   27 July 2016 at 12:16 pm

   Here is hoping that common sense prevails and that there is some out as well as some up in the solutions.

   Will be interesting to see how the IHP handle the RUB. Will it be set in stone as per the PAUP, or will be be more flexible?
   • Muttonbird 3.1

     27 July 2016 at 12:21 pm

     First sentence is generalised waffle and the second sentence is deliberately obtuse.

     You are a fool.
     • James 3.1.1

       27 July 2016 at 12:44 pm

       yes Dear.

       Ill help you – what part are you having difficulty with and Ill try to explain it to you.
       • Muttonbird 3.1.1.1

         27 July 2016 at 9:24 pm

         It was a shit post from you. Parroted lines. Acronyms for the sake of it. No links. Just shit.

         Surprised you didn’t get the bold text.
   • Anne 3.2

     27 July 2016 at 12:37 pm

     Just don’t RUB the IHP into the PAUP. Could get messy.
4. Keith 4

   27 July 2016 at 6:54 pm

   Think about it. Because the National Party will not do anything about immigration because it gives the pretense of growth and an endless supply of cheap labour, or housing speculation again purely out of self interest, most Aucklanders face incredibly intensive housing and quite potentially having a multi level set of buildings overlooking them. Not only that but the tear-arse building that is going on is bound to produce slums, of that there can be no doubt.

   With his usual gall and bullshit tonight Nick Smith said so innocent like, that he didn’t want to comment on the unitary plan for fear of being seen to try and influence the process. Fuck National are unbelievable. That is exactly what Bill English did in the last month by threatening to take over the Auckland Council if they didn’t do precisely what this shitty plan entails!

   Why should ordinary Aucklanders pay for Nationals fucked up policies?
5. Huginn 5

   27 July 2016 at 7:20 pm

   This is a bit shitty:

   The recommendation that sites of value to mana whenua should be disregarded until the ‘evidential basis of their value has been assembled’
   • One Anonymous Bloke 5.1

     27 July 2016 at 7:33 pm

     If you’re investigating the evidential basis of something, how can you ‘disregard’ it at the same time?

     What does the actual text say? I did a search on the website and the word “evidential” doesn’t hit anything…
6. Muttonbird 6

   27 July 2016 at 9:15 pm

   There’s a lot of beige (single house zone) in the leafy suburbs of Remuera and Parnell. Everywhere else is orange, darker orange, and even darker orange.

   I guess it pays to be super rich because nobody will mess with your shit!

   http://www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz/EN/planspoliciesprojects/plansstrategies/unitaryplan/Documents/ihprecommendations/aupzoningmaporakei.pdf
7. Muttonbird 7

   27 July 2016 at 9:20 pm

   Sob story here from a couple of immigrants.

   http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11682457

   Guess what guys. You are part of the problem so suck it up.

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS